[MangoMonkey]

Jason,
 
I think what YOU want (really), is a bulletproof 24/96 usb. I really don't know whether you want to get into the business of writing device drivers for windows. What's worse, you'll have to also spend time maintaining them. That's what'll be the expensive part.
 
Are you going to make a driver just for windows 7? What about vista? what about windows xp? 32 bit OS? 64 bit OS? What about windows 8? mac? Why not Linux?
 
At the very least, you'll have to spend time testing and verifying that it works on each one of these supported platforms. And bugs. What about bugs? Will you also have the infrastructure to get bug reports and crash dumps from folks to investigate crashes that will inevitably occur?
 
I honestly don't think you have the infrastructure to take this on.
 
Now, from a customer perspective:
 
The Mac folks seem to have a SPDIF out, so they're golden.
Let's look at the windows folks:
a) They have a PC (like I do) with both coax and optical out. We're set too, and couldn't care less about usb because like you said, optical is better.
b) They have a laptop/cheap pc without optical out. Dude, just suck it up. We're giving you 24/96 bulletproof. what more do you want? If you really can spend $20 an album to get higher res, just pony up the money to get a decent soundcard with optical out or a laptop with coax.
 
Seriously though. How much music is really available today, in higher res?
 
A better question to put to folks might be:
a) How much high res music do they have today?
b) How much high res do they see getting in the future. And the high res folks: since they're so obstinate about sound quality, will they use usb, or coax?
 

 

[Jason Stoddard]

 
Quote:

Jason,
 
I think what YOU want (really), is a bulletproof 24/96 usb. I really don't know whether you want to get into the business of writing device drivers for windows. What's worse, you'll have to also spend time maintaining them. That's what'll be the expensive part.
 
Are you going to make a driver just for windows 7? What about vista? what about windows xp? 32 bit OS? 64 bit OS? What about windows 8? mac? Why not Linux?
 
At the very least, you'll have to spend time testing and verifying that it works on each one of these supported platforms. And bugs. What about bugs? Will you also have the infrastructure to get bug reports and crash dumps from folks to investigate crashes that will inevitably occur?
 
I honestly don't think you have the infrastructure to take this on.
 
Now, from a customer perspective:
 
The Mac folks seem to have a SPDIF out, so they're golden.
Let's look at the windows folks:
a) They have a PC (like I do) with both coax and optical out. We're set too, and couldn't care less about usb because like you said, optical is better.
b) They have a laptop/cheap pc without optical out. Dude, just suck it up. We're giving you 24/96 bulletproof. what more do you want? If you really can spend $20 an album to get higher res, just pony up the money to get a decent soundcard with optical out or a laptop with coax.
 
Seriously though. How much music is really available today, in higher res?
 
A better question to put to folks might be:
a) How much high res music do they have today?
b) How much high res do they see getting in the future. And the high res folks: since they're so obstinate about sound quality, will they use usb, or coax?
 

This is excellent input, and it mirrors our own internal discussions.
 
So, to "open the kimono" a bit more: we have both 24/96 bulletproof everywhere and 24/192 USB 2.0 running. No real difference in cost. No real difference in sound. Either can go in the entry-level DAC. SPDIF does 24/192 anyway. Windows XP, Vista, and 7 drivers available for USB 2.0 version, Mac doesn't require drivers.
 
But yeah, there's the PITA of installing drivers, answering emails about why drivers didn't install, calls, etc, etc. Believe me, 24/96 is much more appealing in terms of support. It's very, very tempting to say, "24/96 is it for USB." 
 
So yes, let's ask: how much music do you have in high-res, and how important is it? How much is 24/192? 
 
(And, while we're at it, have you ever thought about what 24 bits really means? I mean, no commercial DAC can really reproduce 24 bits. Nor can any commercial ADC record it. And no delta-sigma DAC is outputting the actual bits that went in. And every 24/192 upsampler is throwing away the original bits anyway. Not that we'd do upsampling. Those are the elephants in the room. We'll talk more about those as time goes on.)
 
.
 

 

[olor1n]

Quote:

b) How much high res do they see getting in the future. And the high res folks: since they're so obstinate about sound quality, will they use usb, or coax?
 

Valid points there MM. Resistance to fool proof 24/96 should be countered by this last question lol.

 

[grokit]

Would it be possible to make the usb receiver swappable and therefore futureproof?

 

[hp300plus]

Quote:

Valid points there MM. Resistance to fool proof 24/96 should be countered by this last question lol.

Indeed. Hats off for telling it like it is - a proverbial touché.  Personally sold on the 24/96 bulletproof when put in perspective.  
 
As far as future-proofing, you have to wonder when the "24/192 mainstream availability" future will actually become reality.  It's understandable why so many offer it now (even 32 bit chips) because "it's the next best thing" in what's becoming (or arguably has become) a saturated market.  
 
I'll put my money on a quality product that works beautifully over the latest and greatest that I can't really take advantage of to begin with.
 
 
 

 

[Kremer930]

I am a Mac user and was ready to put my cash down on a M2tech Young until Jason mentioned a DAC or three in the works.

My optical output seems to max at 24/96 and I have played with USB output at 24/192 but decided that the sound was nicer out of optical.

That said, I would choose 192 as this is a tech area and surely Apple will move away from Redbook in the not too distant future. There are certainly rumours of high res iPods and iTunes circulating.

It is just so easy for me to run a music server via iTunes and Mac because of the user friendly and refined user interface.

Can I put down a deposit yet?

 

[vrln]

Quote:

This is excellent input, and it mirrors our own internal discussions.
 
So, to "open the kimono" a bit more: we have both 24/96 bulletproof everywhere and 24/192 USB 2.0 running. No real difference in cost. No real difference in sound. Either can go in the entry-level DAC. SPDIF does 24/192 anyway. Windows XP, Vista, and 7 drivers available for USB 2.0 version, Mac doesn't require drivers.
 
But yeah, there's the PITA of installing drivers, answering emails about why drivers didn't install, calls, etc, etc. Believe me, 24/96 is much more appealing in terms of support. It's very, very tempting to say, "24/96 is it for USB." 
 
So yes, let's ask: how much music do you have in high-res, and how important is it? How much is 24/192? 
 
(And, while we're at it, have you ever thought about what 24 bits really means? I mean, no commercial DAC can really reproduce 24 bits. Nor can any commercial ADC record it. And no delta-sigma DAC is outputting the actual bits that went in. And every 24/192 upsampler is throwing away the original bits anyway. Not that we'd do upsampling. Those are the elephants in the room. We'll talk more about those as time goes on.)
 

MangoMonkeys post mirrored my thoughts 100%. If (and that´s a big if) HD audio someday gains more market share via Apple or whoever, I´m pretty sure it won´t be 24/192. There´s no reason for that - for the common consumer 24/96 is plenty enough, and as you mentioned there´s the whole sound science thing too Noone has been able to differentiate 24/96 and 24/192 in blind tests either.
 
I´d much rather see a small, growing niche company like Schiit not overburden themselves with having to maintain driver software. Personally, if I see an audio product that requires custom drivers, it´s an instant no buy for me. I´m in Linux most of the time (yeah, I bought a HiFace on the promise there would be Linux drivers - still nothing, and even if they come up with those someday, they will be incompatible with the current kernel in no time) and even in Windows I dislike having to use custom drivers, especially for niche hardware.
 
My vote goes for 24/96...

 

[Wedge]

Quote:

(And, while we're at it, have you ever thought about what 24 bits really means? I mean, no commercial DAC can really reproduce 24 bits. Nor can any commercial ADC record it. And no delta-sigma DAC is outputting the actual bits that went in. And every 24/192 upsampler is throwing away the original bits anyway. Not that we'd do upsampling. Those are the elephants in the room. We'll talk more about those as time goes on.)
 

So you're going to use a delta-sigma DAC?
 

 

[bumblingbooby]

 
Quote:

I agree with that USB is truly the new river that runs through HELL it sux I don't use

 
Quote:

Thank god someone else feels the same way that USB sucks I would never use it for audio unless I was on the road with my laptop then I would use my IBasso D6 but at home USB? hahahhaa

 
Quote:

Guess USB is Schiit. Haha I already knew that one that's why I don't use USB

 
Well I'm glad we've established that much. 

  
 
 

 

[Jason Stoddard]

 
Quote:

Would it be possible to make the usb receiver swappable and therefore futureproof?

Ding ding ding ding!

 

[Dynobot]

Interesting discussion here.
 
Progressive.
 
I've been into Computer audio for more than a decade and have probably been in and/or read countless discussions that revolve around the same things over and over.  I'd like to see where this will end up.  I use a slightly novel approach to USB myself.
 

 

[Jason Stoddard]

Quote:

So you're going to use a delta-sigma DAC?
 

No matter how you color it: "advanced segment," "multibit delta-sigma," "hyperstream and dynamic matching," every commercially available 24-bit DAC IC except for the PCM1704 is delta-sigma. And the PCM1704 won't do 192kHz--and to our ears, it sounds kinda, well, boring. So yes, some models will use delta-sigma. Some won't.

 

[Dynobot]

Quote:

 And the PCM1704 won't do 192kHz--and to our ears, it sounds kinda, well, boring. So yes, some models will use delta-sigma. Some won't

In that case AKM might be the ticket....they seem to have a more lively presentation.

 

[Misterrogers]

Great discussion - both from a knowledge perspective and for peeking under the kimono I listen to alot of vinyl rips - for the most part, only those produced by specific individuals who use high end equipment with great care (no declick, etc.). Most of the better rips I listen to are 24/96. It's hard to say that the 24/192 rips are inherently better. Some of them seem to have better separation and more 'air'. Though my bias may be towards 24/192 USB, as we consider the pros/cons - I'd have to say that for Schiit as a company I think you should opt for either capping at 24/96 with no driver support or 24/192 on systems that can support it without drivers. Supporting software will suck the life out of you. Trust me.

 

[grokit]

After further consideration I think that anyone that really needs 192k over 96k could easily figure out how to feed the DAC with coax/toslink instead of usb. 192/usb would still be a nice feature, but it's not entirely necessary.